How about letting them decide? Problem solved for you and them.

Do they? Deliberately? I wasn't aware Cursor AI could browse my system in the background, looking for stuff in unrelated folders and files until I caught it doing exactly that. Sandboxing it to the working folder is a sad exercise in compromise and negotiation. The end result is "kinda sandboxy" rather than a hard boundary.

All the talk of AI ethics and somehow "permissions" has slipped by. I feel like we're back in iPhone 3 days where iOS apps could read and take your contacts without asking, until people complained, then it was finally addressed.

I've seen the satellite images. You could probably throw a baseball from the compound to the school.

If Iran's navy were stationed off the Florida coast and their commanders making threats, US authorities would remove children from the schools near military bases. Wouldn't they?

All parties are expected to protect civilians. Iran were obligated to move non-combatants, especially children, out of immediate danger zones around military targets. They didn't do that. Instead the school was packed with kids while US military is parked outside, tensions higher than ever. Iranian authorities failed their own people. Again.

You are right about the old templating systems. I still use them. I still use PHP, it's ridiculously fast and mature. It has a readability unmatched by other languages (for devs like me with design background).

I'm surprised to hear CS people like yourself talking up the old templating systems!

> I hate modern web development.

For me, modern web dev is about modern CSS and JS and native browser APIs and all that fun stuff. It's ironic now with LLMs, the people caught in the grinding gears of MVC bloat are benefiting least from LLM.

Well, perhaps I can't make that claim, but the point is LLMs do a fantastic job at focused, single-layer arrangements such as the good old templating systems, vanilla JS and just direct "old school" frontend coding. Why burden ourselves or the LLM with truck loads of layered dependencies or a million steps to hello world? No need but people get angry on this topic though, so I just do my thing in my corner of the web and deliver results for those I build for.

In reality, deliberately taking a second recording device other than your phone, escalates intention and risk. If we assume the visitors were unaware of the phone rule before arrival, there's no chance anyone will bring a second recording device.

> A visitor who wants to record...

Will use the recording device they already carry.

If discovered, your phone can hide behind a million excuses. "whoops, I forgot to end my call" or "whoops, I forgot to shut down my streaming app." It can also hide its recording status when using certain covert or custom apps. It is the ultimate recording device able to operate in the open.

His mistrust might be about the phone's owner and the recording apps they might use, more than the smartphone itself.

Socially it's much safer to direct suspicion at "the smartphone" rather than the people invited to your house.

The question wasn't "do you know this riddle", she just wanted the riddle answered. No need to make it more complicated.

There's no lie in withholding information never asked for. It's possible the request for a new riddle was interpreted as a ploy to get an easier riddle.

If the project is a mountain, I want AI to assist with the climb so I can learn the mountain, its trails and details. Hitching a free helicopter ride to the summit would leave me with little understanding about the mountain other than the view from the top.

Your claim directly contradicts Musk's statement on the issue:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350

Your claim also doesn't align with actual testing of the platform. This raises the question, why are you here posting disinformation?

By your own admission, you've seen it generate such things.

Meanwhile, I've never seen it generate such things because I don't write sicko prompts, and the guardrails in place prevent such images. Most people have never seen it generate such things, but apparently you have. I couldn't be more intellectually honest if I tried.

How dare they show people stuff!

Reminds me of the perpetrators of crimes against women who blame what women wear. "She provoked me by showing her ankles! I didn't like it but the next day she was showing me her ankles again!"

Now the counter-weight over-compensation. Insisting the tool "doesn't have enough safeguards". Could it be that our AI usage innocence is related to how much we criticise the tool for not policing us enough?

Meanwhile the rest of us have never seen such images because we're not looking for those images, or trying to prompt for those images, or thinking about those images. How about the people using these tools take responsibility, rather than forcing colossal layers of safeguards on everything and everyone?

Must be stressful maintaining the low quality rhetoric and negativity?

Straight from reddit I presume, to regurgitate tales about cave divers. This is the diver who bizarrely and publicly attacked Musk for trying to help rescue kids from a cave. "Shove his submarine up his rear end" or something. Musk fired back his own stupid words. The court awarded the diver zero dollars. Diver wanted $190 million! Pay day denied! Justice served.

> The real life people I know...

Any real life person who keeps it real, knows the diver was an absolute tool. Attempting to twist history for some kind anti-Musk ammo is a fool's game.

The "addictive" insisting by 2 new ones in short time? Getting bot vibes. "We need to classify social media as an addictive substance" more or less. Is that from someone's e-safety commissioner? Or someone wanting back-pay compo right back to MySpace addiction. An absurd idea.

"Some people can't control themselves around video games therefore video games bad", that's what social media has copped.

"Addictive" might mean a bloody well designed user interface that users like. Making buttons easy to access and responsive feedback and just the right amount of visual cues and spicy labels, all in harmony as designed and delivered via well engineered mechanisms. "Too addictive, you must now jump through regulatory hoops". No!

Nobody said you can't. They said the happiness is "decoupled from truth", which isn't ideal if we care about objective health of a society.

Your position seems to imply support for society-level submission to religious dogma. There's no point ignoring actual examples of all these ideas.

Hold an "uncommon belief"? According to you, it's a sign you're wrong. "the world isn't crazy, it's you who's missing something"... and you even say "let people continue being wrong for the sake of being social."

I don't think you meant to express support for strict religious rule and population submission, but that's how I'm reading it.

Your argument supports those who seek submission from the population. You don't require objective truth to play a role in happiness. You have found value in submission that serves to neutralise dissent. Dissent when coming from the few, isn't worth your time. Peg those few dissenters as "probably wrong" and call it a day.

There's almost endless choice of legit quality native apps for kids, curated from trusted sources. These alone far exceed healthy screen time if all were downloaded. Or as you say, curated web links in a locked browser.

How much screen time should kids do anyway, it's crazy how much is available before worrying about WWW on top of their games, apps and videos.